From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Latest suggestion for 202x
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 11:12:58 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Message-ID: <lnd0j6kdsl.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
References: <728c4668-8fa0-4a57-a502-2bf476fc3940@googlegroups.com>
	<4908c3e3-18dc-4953-bf26-46f160d2ebfd@googlegroups.com>
	<9dcf22a2-2255-4089-b1f0-93e31448415e@googlegroups.com>
	<86h88obeu0.fsf@gaheris.avalon.lan>
	<39e749cd-de5c-44fa-b8ec-50d36f3bd52c@googlegroups.com>
	<qe8b41$pji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <lnef3rnb8d.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
	<qeh0sh$3rd$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk> <qei8ps$nec$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="caa34a360db6aaf02b280eb2c1355383";
	logging-data="8279"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Q5n8oZXGVQDo9hB3NVMMP"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+29ZFGoOSGnPlrKMqrnFA/N0Bn8=
	sha1:arLjgw9gvdHsQCzXn8vihph19pk=
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:56702
Date: 2019-06-21T11:12:58-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> On 2019-06-21 00:21, Randy Brukardt wrote:
>> "Keith Thompson" <kst-u@mib.org> wrote in message
>> news:lnef3rnb8d.fsf@kst-u.example.com...
>> ...
>>> I'm not at all persuaded by the argument that array indexing is
>>> interchangeable with function calls.
>>>
>>>     A(I) = 42;
>>
>> If A is a container, A(I) *is* a function call. QED. :-)
>
> It is many function calls actually. I wish it were just one:
>
>    Array_Type'Component_Setter (A, I, 42)
>
> I think Keith probably meant something else, since it is self-evident
> that array indexing is decomposable into calls to properly typed
> subprograms (differently to, say, object construction).

Of course the argument about interchangeability of array indexing and
function calling goes back before containers existed in Ada.

In my example, if A is an array variable and I've written
    A(I) = 42;
I *can't* replace A by a function without modifying the code that uses
it.  Array indexing can appear on the LHS of an assignment; a function
call cannot (or at least could not until recently).

I suppose containers weaken that argument -- but if Ada had used [] for
array indexing from the beginning, then presumably containers would have
used that same syntax.

(And again, I'm not suggesting a change to the language.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */